The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.

Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?

It seems to me that all of this is very similar to how the first two World Wars got started. You could look at it similarly to how the Austro-Hungarian Empire invaded Serbia after Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated (obviously with no assassination this time, :P). You could also point out similarities to Nazi aggression in the pre-war years, invading their weaker neighbors. Don't be surprised if this whole thing ends very badly. On the one hand, Georgia has been a good democratic ally in the area, and the US would like to support them. On the other hand, we're not about to get into a slugging match with Russia right now. Forget about any UN action, as Russia will use its Security Council seat to nullify any US proposed peacekeeping action. Let's face it, the UN is about as effectual nowadays as the League of Nations was in the 1930's. I only hope that this doesn't spark off WWIII, because these things don't start off with a bang, usually it's a gigantic snowball effect.

What makes you feel that the US is the last word on morals?

Iraq should be one of the many examples!

And yet no WW III!

Don't be an alarmist!

UN is ineffective not because it is ineffective as such. It is ineffective of the Big 5 and who are responsible for all the miseries of the world!!

"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

The big five are responsible for all the miseries in the world? Oh to have such power! I am afraid local tribes can still dish out misery quite well without the big five even noticing. They do make a convenient target to blame however to distract from local failures of culture or governance...

The big five are responsible for all the miseries in the world? Oh to have such power! I am afraid local tribes can still dish out misery quite well without the big five even noticing. They do make a convenient target to blame however to distract from local failures of culture or governance...

It is so cute.

Worked in the UN?

How much are you aware of the Big 5 working?

Every issue referred to the UNSC is decided by the Big 5 and their veto!

"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

On Russia: without a doubt, Russia has overreacted and used unproportional response to the Goergian combat action in South Ossetia.

Nah, unproportional would have been to level Tblisi in response. And a few dozen strategic sorties could have done that, easily. An overreaction would have been to drop a paratrooper division or two into Tbilisi and enforce regime change, while securing South Ossetian and Abchasian secession at the same time.

The war is actually rather restrained in my opinion, considering Georgia was violating its treaties with both South Ossetia (1996 memorandum) and Russia (1993 CIS accession). Push Georgians beyond declared border; create buffer zone beyond; bomb a handful targets that could threaten Russian assets - seriously, that is a restrained answer. Especially as they've so far only used a single ground Army, a handful substrategic air assets, and a single real sortie of the Black Sea fleet in a blockade movement.

Originally Posted by Chronograph

Actually, Russia should thank Mr. Saakashvili. He's given the Russians a great opportunity to restore their dominance in Caucasus.

True. And he has single-handedly destroyed all near- to mid-future prospects for any additional CIS countries to join NATO, judging by the European responses. As well as completely destroying any notion in its neighbor states that the US would support them, or even care about them.

It seems fairly obvious to me that Russia was hoping for a chance to get this war on. If reports are really accurate it was probably right for them to try to protect civilians and their own troops considering they took losses in the initial fighting. Still, they clearly wanted more than that, and Im sure they only signed the ceasefire so as to preserve public image back in Russia and to appease the rest of the world. If there hadn't been such a public outcry all of Georgia would have been taken over by now.

Georgia was greatly to blame though for its aggressive tactics used in S.O (even though the casuality numbers are uncertain). Also, it did not tell the US or any allies about the plan and then asked for international assistance. Surely they would have expected a Russian response.

Saaskavili is a cunning man and he does a good job kissing butts and playing up to other people's politics, especially NATO members, but I think he has good intentions overall. Hes a hard man to read.

But Putin is quite crafty himself.

As in most conflicts, neither side is completely correct. In the case of lesser of two evils--I would say Georgia though.

You should really read up on Georgian history. When the turks would come into village, Georgians would be the first to present their sons to become Janisarries. Georgians don't fight to the end, they capitulate. The Pre-baltic states are a pit for Russia, I don't see Russians going into that ungrateful region ever again. And that black sea fleet port is originally Russian. You should hear what the people who live there say.

I'm not going to defend Georgia's ill-prepared attack, but do you really need to bring ancient tribal/ethnic slurs to the discussion? After all, the Russians spent a long time as doormats for the Tatars, and one can tell endless stories of how the Russians set new standards for grovelling.

Hypocrisy by NATO

i had earlier posted this on another thread but i feel it is more appropriate here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The KLA attempted to wrest Kosovo from Serbia and Serbia sent in the army. Without bothering with a UN resolution Nato bombed them out and advanced through Kovoso up to what is now called 'Serbia proper'.
At the time Russia complained bitterly that a sovereign nation's borders were being violated by the 'international community' or by what the Serbs called the 'Nato fascist aggressor'.
Moscow called on the Nato powers to halt the bombing which killed several thousand Serb civilians and which targeted among other things a television station.
Without dout Nato descended into farcical claims of 100,000 Kosovan men being killed and of football stadiums full of prisoners. It was rubbish.
This spring the US and most of the EU nations recognised Kosovan independence and thus legitimised the changing of a sovereign state's borders through violence - their own.

just replace NATO with Russia and vice versa, Serbia with Georgia, kla with south ossetian rebels,... you get my drift

i had earlier posted this on another thread but i feel it is more appropriate here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

just replace NATO with Russia and vice versa, Serbia with Georgia, kla with south ossetian rebels,... you get my drift

I do get your drift. What I'm confused about is that you seem to be justifying as correct the Russian actions by NATO's prior actions, yet decrying NATO's actions
NATO's bad actions make Russia's good?

In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

I do get your drift. What I'm confused about is that you seem to be justifying as correct the Russian actions by NATO's prior actions, yet decrying NATO's actions
NATO's bad actions make Russia's good?

NATO and the US' bad actions does not make any action good.

It only justifies such actions.

However, that is not what rankles.

What rankles is the Holier than Thou attitude!

There is a saying in my part of the world - Ekto chori, phir sina jori?

Loosely translated it mean - first you steal and then get pious?

How is it that what the US and NATO does is like the Infallibility of the Pope?

And everyone who opposes are Sinners?

Let those without sin cast the first stone...

What if Russia did an Iraq and then hung Saaskavelli? At least, they are not doing that even though both are the faces of the same coin!

US was not justified in Iraq. They are not the second coming of Christ to cleanse this world!

Last edited by Ray; 14 Aug 08, at 10:02.

"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

Holier than thou?
I'm just confused how Russia can invade a neighbour, (yes, South Ossetia is a part of Georgia, far more so than say Kashmir is a part of India), destroy their infrastructure, occupy more than half their country, and somehow it ends up as America's fault.

In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.